Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it specifies a limit of 20 property statements, mentions 300+ language support, and notes the CC-0 license. Annotations already cover safety and idempotency, so this is appropriate supplementation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is highly concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and an example, and includes key details without unnecessary verbosity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given that an output schema exists, the description appropriately focuses on input requirements and behavioral traits without needing to detail return values. It covers the key aspects for a read-only tool with good annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with a clear parameter description. The description reinforces the source of IDs and provides examples, but does not add significant new information beyond what the schema already conveys.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get structured data for a Wikidata entity by ID'), provides a concrete example (Q42 = Douglas Adams), and distinguishes itself from the sibling search tool by indicating where to obtain IDs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly instructs the agent to obtain IDs from the sibling tool 'knowledge.wikidata.search', which provides clear guidance on prerequisite usage. It also describes the returned data types, though it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.